Skip to main content
Glama
LGDiMaggio

Predictive Maintenance MCP Server

by LGDiMaggio

generate_diagnostic_report_docx

Generate a structured .docx diagnostic report from a stored signal, with optional sections for statistics, FFT/envelope peaks, bearing frequencies, ISO severity, and diagnosis.

Instructions

Generate a structured Word (.docx) diagnostic report for a stored signal.

Requires: ``pip install predictive-maintenance-mcp[docx]``

``sections`` is a dict whose keys define what to include (all optional):
  - statistics:           dict  (RMS, Kurtosis, Crest Factor …)
  - fft_peaks:            list  [{frequency, magnitude_db, note}, …]
  - envelope_peaks:       list  [{frequency, magnitude_db, match}, …]
  - bearing_frequencies:  dict  {BPFO, BPFI, BSF, FTF}
  - iso:                  dict  (mapped from assess_severity output)
  - diagnosis:            str   (free-text diagnostic summary)

Args:
    signal_id: ID of the stored signal (from load_signal); used for
        the report title / filename.
    sections: Content sections to include (see above)
    title: Optional custom report title
    ctx: MCP context. Unused — see this module's docstring on logging.

Returns:
    Dictionary with file_path, file_name, and per-section summary.

Raises:
    ValueError: If the signal_id is not loaded, or python-docx is
        not installed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleNo
sectionsYes
signal_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and meets it: it discloses prerequisites (pip install), error conditions (ValueError for missing signal or python-docx), the return type (dictionary with file_path, file_name, summary), and notes that ctx is unused. This exceeds typical transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with a clear opening summary, a detailed but organized sections breakdown, and concise Args/Returns/Raises. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is front-loaded with the main purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with nested objects, 3 parameters, and no annotations, the description is comprehensive: it covers prerequisites, errors, return format, and parameter details. The presence of an output schema does not reduce the need for this clarity, and the description fully delivers.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema provides only types and a generic sections object, while the description supplies rich semantics: it enumerates the allowed section keys (statistics, fft_peaks, etc.), expected types and shapes, and explains how signal_id and title are used (report title/filename). This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Generate a structured Word (.docx) diagnostic report for a stored signal.' The .docx format and diagnostic report scope clearly distinguish it from sibling tools like generate_diagnostic_report or generate_fft_report, even without naming them.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description clearly states the prerequisite that the signal must be stored (from load_signal) and requires an install. It also clarifies that 'sections' is optional, implying usage context. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, so it stops short of a 5.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/LGDiMaggio/predictive-maintenance-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server